Written By: - Date published: 2:23 pm, June 30th, 2008 - 73 comments
Categories: john key, same old national, slippery -
Tags: kate gorgeous, rdu
Remember Noelle McCarthy’s 95bFM interview with Brash in which she got him to admit to knowledge of the Brethren pamphlets? Student radio has done it again.
Hager’s weekend article in the Sunday Star Times detailed an ongoing advisory relationship between the National Party and political consultants Crosby Textor.
But RDU’s Kate Gorgeous asked John Key back in November 2007, “Have you got any advisors round now that are seen in The Hollow Men?”.
Here’s John Key’s reply:
And here’s the full audio from Scoop.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
What I find interesting is how quick and decisive he is in his responses when he’s answering honestly.
Pretty solid indicator of just how often he’s obfuscating (/lying)… I don’t think I’ve ever HEARD him give a direct and clear answer before.
Liar, liar, pants on fire. Can the media ever trust JK to tell them the truth?
Denying that Crosby/Textor is running your campaign is another classic part of a Crosby/Textor campaign
Listening to an overly angry Hooten on RNZ this morning I would say that Mr Hager has struck a very raw nerve indeed.
Methinks there is more to come
Denying that you eat babies is another classic part of being a baby eater – could this get any more silly.
SP thats a ridiculous statement to make… I believe that Labour has also denied that C/T are running their campaign…along with ACT, NZ First and even of all people The Kiwi Party!
Just thought about it some more… his direct answer to “Is Peter Keenan still working for you” is actually pretty incompetent. There’s a reason people use the “I can neither confirm nor deny” line John – because if you don’t then failure to answer provides an answer.
Q: Is Peter Keenan still working for you?
A: No. (followed by fairly complete denial of association)
Q: Are any of the other advisors from the 2005 election still working for you?
A: Ummm… mumblefnck mumblefnck qualify divert (read: Yes).
He’s not even particularly good at being a deceitful prick unless coaching is immediately on hand.
What on earth are you National supporters voting for? Can you not SEE the parallels between Nationals campaign thus far and GW Bush’s election platforms?
Please don’t tell me you were rooting for the Republicans… I’ll lose what little faith I have left…
mmmm, ahhhh, errrrr, basically….
HS. Even I wasn’t going as far as equating using Crosby/Textor to eating babies but you’re right in the general point – you hide stuff that you think people don’t want to hear.
Incidentally, HS or anyone. Can you give me three reasons why Key would make a good PM?
where in that clip does he deny having crosby and textor? Can someone give me a reference of how many seconds through the clip he says that?
1 He is not HC
2 He is not HC
3 He is not HC… that would some up the general mode of the nation going on the latest polls.
Oooh oooh!
1) He’s rich.
2) He “seems like the kind of guy you could have a beer with”.
3) He’s not Helen Clark.
What do I win?
edit: jinx Lucas, but I still think I deserve the prize
T-Rex
Regarding the US – I’m on record here as saying I wouldn’t mind McCain or Obama as long as there’s an end to the Bushs and Clintons.
Lukas makes the point loud and clear. He’d be equally happy with Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Uncle Joe or Mao, Pinochet, or John Key as PM. Presumably so long as any one of them had some nice lines from C/T to feed him.
When? – 1:31 “any other advisors from the 2005 election?” (question presumably aimed at getting around his initial misdirection about ‘office staff’). Key: “ummmmmmmmmmmm… from the top of my head no”.
Bloody hard to reconcile this denial with the (now known) facts, particularly given the prominence (then and now) of Crosby Texter’s involvement, both with the Party strategy and “brand Key” generally.
HS: Interesting – Do you realise McCain is on record saying that that his views aligned with those of Bush on practically every significant issue of Bush’s presidency?
He might be slightly smarter (it’s open to debate), but he wouldn’t have done anything differently as a result.
Lukas. But what about you personally? Are those the three reasons why you personally think Key would make a better PM?
when? He says he can’t name any of Brash’s outside advisors that he is using – yet a week into his time as Leader he personally hired Crisby/Textor, who had created National’s 2005 campaign. He had been meeting with them personally each month.
MP- Wow… you could get a job in the Labour PR department with a statement like that!
SP- no not at all. I am still in the undecided camp to be perfectly honest, though I think my chances of voting Labour are small at best due to some of the policy they have put through thus far. Also I believe that they are getting more and more dishonest… though it started in the first few months with the getting rid of the then Police Commissioner.
That’s interesting. So is anyone a firm National voter (or ACT voter, that’s a vote for Key for PM too)? And can they tell us why they think Key would be a good PM?
What about with your mates over the ditch, Lukas? Reckon I’ve got a shot? I mean, there was nothing untrue in it, most readers probably got the point and you weren’t able to launch a decent criticism. That’s what they’re after, right?
Steve, you’ve been asking that question of teh right for some time now – I don’t thnik you’ve had a nibble. I’ll have a go instead.
Kiwisaver (wait, they’ll probably weaken it as much as possible)
Nuclear free (wait, they’re just saying it, and would change the policy in a second, if they could. Kinda makes it worse, pretending to support it)
WfF (wait, they’re opposed to it, but won’t remove it because, well, they have no better ideas)
No sale of state assets (hmm. I’m sure they’d try to find a way around this, no thanks, I just don’t believe it. Not to mention the ‘first term’ caveat)
Anti-PC (wait, “PC” is just a bullshit code to denigrate ideas that are anti-racist, and promote tolerance, not to mention decent ethics and so-on. Why would they be against that?)
I got nothing. I’d honestly struggle to give a single reason. I suppose I’ll stand to do pretty well if his tax cuts do what National’s tax cuts generally do, but I’m not in it for me, so to speak.
OK SP I’ll play your game
I think Key may make an interesting and successful Prime Minister for the following reasons.
1. He has come from a modest background and succeeded in a cut throat business environment.
2. He comes to parliament without any ideological baggage.
3. He appears to have broad public appeal across the electorate.
HS
1) So has pretty much everyone else who’s succeeded in a cut-throat business environment I think you’ll find.
2) Yeah, right. Because 15 years in currency trading earning a nickname reflecting complete lack of empathy doesn’t point to any ideological leanings at all.
3) Uhhh…. have you even been reading this thread?
HS said: He appears to have broad public appeal across the electorate.
T-rex replied: Uhhh . have you even been reading this thread?
T-rex,
You are in la-la land if you think this blog in any way reflects the electorate. I would be equally sceptical of anything said on Kiwiblog when it’s argued that it’s representative of the electorate at large.
Poll The Standard’s readers on their political views. Then graph them with the last 20 political polls. See how closely they correlate.
Here’s my reasons for voting for him:
1.Unlike Clark he has proven himself away from the public tit. He is succesfully self made.
2. He is a family man. IMO having children qualifies him more to speak on family issues than someone who does not
3.He is smart and engages people well. (some work to do on communication via media though)
HS, perhaps you can fill in some gaps for me:
I think Key may make an interesting and successful Prime Minister for the following reasons.
1. He believes in _________, which is something I respect.
2. He says he will pass legislation to _______ and I believe him.
3. I couldn’t think up a number three.
Can we take it then that this is the “neutron bomb” that you guys on the left have been promising, and if so, is an early election imminent? Even if this issue has any substance, or any capacity to damage Key, isn’t it a bit too soon, unless you guys know something about the timing of an election that we don’t?
How about one reason *not* to vote for him? As evidenced by the audio clip he seems to struggle to tell the truth. Does anyone really give a shit whether he’s a “family man” or whatever if he can’t even be straight with the voting public? Seems to me the righties are burying their heads in the sand over this one…
Higherstandard’s number 3 – I think he’s good because he’s popular (eh?!)
Um, IV2, there is no neutron bomb. Never was as far as I know. Where was this rumour actually sourced from? The first I heard of it was Matthew “Hollow Man” Hooton.
mike, do you think your number 2 was the reason he got involved with the S59 debate and ensured it would pass?
Do you see the contradiction between 1 & 2? If he’s good because he has kids, doesn’t that also mean he’ll only be good at representing the interests of multi-millionaires? You’re not going to get all trickle-down on us are you?
Really those are the reaons you would give someone the most powerful job in the country – he grew up in a state house, he’s rich, and he’s nice?
Would any of you hire someone for you workplace on the same grounds?
if you want truth or obfuscation, HC has hardly got an unblemished reputation over the years. So let’s not be too precious here.
Are you chaps arguing that the following wouldn’t be good things to have in a Prime Minister ?
1. Broad appeal across the electorate.
2. Very significant success and experience in the financial markets.
3. Personal experience of the benefits of social welfare as a youngster.
4. Not being linked to the to left or right ideologies.
If you are I would be interested in your rationale.